Advertisement

Quality in Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography—Incidence and Predictive Factors of Adverse Events

Published:August 02, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tige.2021.07.002

      Abstract

      Background and Aims

      Incidence of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-related adverse events varies between endoscopy units. We aimed to identify factors related to successful bile duct (BD) cannulation and to determine the incidence and predictive factors of post-ERCP adverse events.

      Methods

      About 1103 ERCPs were evaluated from a prospective database over a 4-year period and 57 were excluded: age <18 years; incomplete procedure; surgically altered small bowel anatomy and refusal of informed consent. Factors associated with successful BD cannulation and predictive of post-ERCP adverse events were evaluated.

      Results

      Out of 1046 ERCPs analyzed, successful cannulation rate of native papilla of Vater was 91.3% (n = 639). Guidewire-assisted BD cannulation and choledocholithiasis were associated with higher native papilla cannulation rates (P = 0.02 and P < 0.001). Malignant biliary stricture and acute gallstone pancreatitis were associated with lower native papilla cannulation rates (P < 0.001 and P = 0.024). The incidence of post-ERCP adverse events was: Pancreatitis (PEP) 2.7% (n = 28), bleeding 0.8% (n = 8), cholangitis 0.7% (n = 7) and perforation 0.5% (n = 5). PEP risk was significantly higher in patients with native papilla compared with non-native papilla (rate of 3.6% and 0.6%, respectively, P = 0.005). In patients with native papilla, ≥2 unintentional pancreatic duct cannulations was the only independent predictive factor associated with PEP (odds ratio 2.371, 95% confidence interval: 1.003-5.605, P = 0.049).

      Conclusion

      Choledocholithiasis is associated with a higher cannulation rate while malignant biliary stricture and acute gallstone pancreatitis are associated with a lower BD cannulation rate. Patients with native papilla have a significantly higher risk of PEP with the only factor associated with PEP being 2 or more unintentional pancreatic duct cannulations.

      Keywords

      Abbreviations used in this paper:

      BD (bile duct), CC (contrast-assisted), CBD (common bile duct), ERCP (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography), ES (endoscopic sphincterotomy), GW (guidewire-assisted), OR (odds ratio), PEP (post-ERCP pancreatitis)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
      AGA Member Login
      Login with your AGA username and password.
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Cotton PB
        • Lehman G
        • Vennes J
        • et al.
        Endoscopic sphincterotomy complications and their management: an attempt at consensus.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 1991; 37: 383-393
        • Andriulli A
        • Loperfido S
        • Napolitano G
        • et al.
        Incidence rates of post-ERCP complications: a systematic survey of prospective studies.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2007; 102: 1781-1788https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01279.x
        • Kochar B
        • Akshintala VS
        • Afghani E
        • et al.
        Incidence, severity, and mortality of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review by using randomized, controlled trials.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2015; 81: 143-149https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2014.06.045
        • Testoni PA
        • Mariani A
        • Giussani A
        • et al.
        Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis in high- and low-volume centers and among expert and non-expert operators : a prospective multicenter study.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2010; 105: 1753-1761
        • Barthet M
        • Lesavre N
        • Desjeux A
        • et al.
        Complications of endoscopic sphincterotomy: results from a single tertiary referral center.
        Endoscopy. 2002; 34: 991-997
        • Cotton P
        • Garrow D
        • Gallagher J
        • et al.
        Risk factors for complications after ERCP: a multivariate analysis of 11,497 procedures over 12 years.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70: 80-88https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.039
        • Cheng CL
        • Sherman S
        • Watkins JL
        • et al.
        Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a prospective multicenter study.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2006; 101: 139-147https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00380.x
        • Chen J-J
        • Wang X-M
        • Liu X-Q
        • et al.
        Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review of clinical trials with a large sample size in the past 10 years.
        Eur J Med Res. 2014; 19: 26
        • Cotton PB
        • Eisen GM
        • Aabakken L
        • et al.
        A lexicon for endoscopic adverse events: report of an ASGE workshop.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2010; 71: 446-454https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2009.10.027
        • Ferreira L
        • Baron T.
        Post-sphincterotomy bleeding: who, what, when, and how.
        Am J Gastroenterol. 2007; 102: 2850-2858https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1572-0241.2007.01563.x
        • Stapfer M
        • Selby RR
        • Stain SC
        • et al.
        Management of duodenal perforation after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and sphincterotomy.
        Ann Surg. 2000; 232: 191-198
        • Cirocchi R
        • Kelly MD
        • Griffiths EA
        • et al.
        A systematic review of the management and outcome of ERCP related duodenal perforations using a standardized classification system.
        Surgeon. 2017; 15: 379-387
        • Yokoe M
        • Hata J
        • Takada T
        • et al.
        Tokyo guidelines 2018: diagnostic criteria and severity grading of acute cholecystitis (with videos).
        J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2018; 25: 41-54https://doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.515
        • Dumonceau JM
        • Kapral C
        • Aabakken L
        • et al.
        ERCP-related adverse events: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline.
        Endoscopy. 2020; 52: 127-149https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1075-4080
        • Testoni PA
        • Mariani A
        • Aabakken L
        • et al.
        Papillary cannulation and sphincterotomy techniques at ERCP: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline.
        Endoscopy. 2016; 48: 657-683https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-108641
        • Bourke MJ
        • Costamagna G
        • Freeman ML.
        Biliary cannulation during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: core technique and recent innovations.
        Endoscopy. 2009; 41: 612-617https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0029-1214859
        • Cheung J
        • Tsoi KK
        • Quan WL
        • et al.
        Guidewire versus conventional contrast cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2009; 70: 1211-1229
        • Bailey A
        • Bourke MJ
        • Williams SJ
        • et al.
        A prospective randomized trial of cannulation technique in ERCP: effects on technical success and post ERCP pancreatitis.
        Endoscopy. 2008; 40: 296-301https://doi.org/10.1055/s−2007−995566
        • Mariani A
        • Giussani A
        • Di Leo M
        • et al.
        Guidewire biliary cannulation does not reduce post-ERCP pancreatitis compared with the contrast injection technique in low-risk and high-risk patients.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2012; 75: 339-346https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2011.09.002
        • Tse F
        • Yuan Y
        • Moayyedi P
        • et al.
        Guidewire-assisted cannulation of the common bile duct for the prevention of post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) pancreatitis.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 12 (Art. No.: CD009662)https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009662.pub2
        • Chen PH
        • Tung CF
        • Peng YC
        • et al.
        Duodenal major papilla morphology can affect biliary cannulation and complications during ERCP, an observational study.
        BMC Gastroenterol. 2020; 20: 310https://doi.org/10.1186/s12876-020-01455-0
        • Haraldsson E
        • Kylänpää L
        • Grönroos J
        • et al.
        Macroscopic appearance of the major duodenal papilla influences bile duct cannulation: a prospective multicenter study by the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy Study Group for ERCP.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2019; 90: 957-963https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2019.07.014
        • Freeman ML
        • Guda NM.
        ERCP cannulation: a review of reported techniques.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2005; 61: 112-125https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02463-0
        • Fukatsu H
        • Kawamoto H
        • Kato H
        • et al.
        Evaluation of needle-knife precut papillotomy after unsuccessful biliary cannulation, especially with regard to postoperative anatomic factors.
        Surg Endosc. 2008; 22: 717-723https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9473-8
        • Cotton PB
        • Eisen G
        • Romagnuolo J
        • et al.
        Grading the complexity of endoscopic procedures: results of an ASGE working party.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2011; 73: 868-874https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2010.12.036
        • Dániel P
        • Szilárd G
        • Hegyi P
        • et al.
        ERCP is more challenging in cases of acute biliary pancreatitis than in acute cholangitis—analysis of the Hungarian ERCP registry data.
        Pancreatology. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pan.2020.11.025
        • Barakat MT
        • Banerjee S.
        Sequential endoscopist-driven phone calls improve the capture rate of adverse events after ERCP: a prospective study.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.07.036
        • Ding X
        • Zhang F
        • Wang Y.
        Risk factors for post-ERCP pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Surgeon. 2015; 13: 218-229
        • Halttunen J
        • Meisner S
        • Aabakken L
        • et al.
        Difficult cannulation as defined by a prospective study of the Scandinavian Association for Digestive Endoscopy (SADE) in 907 ERCPs.
        Scand J Gastroenterol. 2014; 49: 752-758
        • Masci E
        • Mariani A
        • Curioni S
        • et al.
        Risk factors for pancreatitis following endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography: a meta-analysis.
        Endoscopy. 2003; 35: 830-834
        • Tang Z
        • Yang Y
        • Yang Z
        • et al.
        Early precut sphincterotomy does not increase the risk of adverse events for patients with difficult biliary access: A systematic review of randomized clinical trials with metaanalysis and trial sequential analysis.
        Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97: e12213
        • Sundaralingam P
        • Masson P
        • Bourke MJ.
        Early precut sphincterotomy does not increase risk during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with difficult biliary access: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2015; 13: 1722-1729
        • Buxbaum J
        • Yan A
        • Yeh K
        • et al.
        Aggressive hydration with lactated Ringer's solution reduces pancreatitis after endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014; 12 (.e1): 303-307https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2013.07.026
        • Serrano JPR
        • de Moura DTH
        • Bernardo WM
        • et al.
        Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs versus placebo for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Endosc Int Open. 2019; 7: E477-E486https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0862-0215
        • Nakaji S
        • Hirata N
        • Matsui H
        • et al.
        Hemodialysis is a strong risk factor for post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding in patients with choledocholithiasis.
        Endosc Int Open. 2018; 06: E568-E574
        • Chen M
        • Wang L
        • Wang Y
        • et al.
        Risk factor analysis of post-ERCP cholangitis: a single-center experience.
        Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int HBPD INT. 2018; 17: 55-58
        • Weiser R
        • Pencovich N
        • Mlynarsky L
        • et al.
        Management of endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography–related perforations: experience of a tertiary center.
        Surgery. 2017; 161: 920-929